Did the White House order a cover-up over the murder of Libya's US Ambassador?

Immediately after the murder of Chris Stevens, America's Ambassador to Libya,I suggested that the assault on the US consulate in Benghazi on September 11 could have profound consequences for President Barack Obama,particulary if he failed to take appropriate action against the murderers–the most likely candidates being members of al-Qaeda's new terror franchise in Mali.

But with the US presidential contest entering its critical final phase, the Obama administration deftly avoided getting into any controversy over the murder of Mr Stevens and three other members of the consulate staff by leading everyone to believe the murders were not part of an al-Qaeda plot, but the result of an outbreak of violence caused by a blaphemous film clip. This was certainly the line advanced by Dr Susan Rice,the American Ambassador to the United Nations, and a close confidante of Mr Obama

But the real smoking gun is whether the Obama administration was warned in advance that al-Qaeda was planning an attack. A number of Israeli newspapers have suggested that Washington was warned as early as September 4–a week earlier–that the environment in Benghazi was becoming increasingly hostile and anti-American,while in London the Foreign Office took the decision to withdraw all its consular staff from Benghazi two months before the murders. This decision was based on an intelligence assessment made by MI6 that al-Qaeda was openly operating in the area following a failed assassination attempt on Sir Dominic Asquith, Britain's ambassador to Libya,in June.

It is well known that British intelligence works closely with its counterpart in America,and if MI6 knew al-Qaeda was operating in the Benghazi region,then it is highly likely that the CIA did too.

Suddenly the Administration's "it's nothing to do with us, guv,"defence is starting to look rather thin, with potentially disastrous consequences for Mr Obama's re-election prospects.

Think back on all the scandals of all the administrations. DNC breakin. Meh. Iran Contra. Yawn. Pick yer clinton scandal. Are we done? Fast & Furious? Getting there.

Rat your country out to the muslim brotherhood, hand several west kowtowed regimes over to them while actively aiding al qaeda, getting our embassies over run and trashed and an ambassador raped and killed, fall all over yourself to get some story that somebody might believe. Oops.

What's the penalty for treason again?

http://www.wnd.com/2012/09/this-scan...t-and-furious/
This scandal could dwarf 'Fast and Furious'
Did White House arm al-Qaida operatives who killed U.S. ambassador?

Published: 22 hours ago by Aaron Klein

JERUSALEM – While echoes of the “Fast and Furious” scandal still resound in the White House, another administration decision at the heart of Obama’s Mideast policy may prove even more explosive. Almost entirely missing from the debate surrounding the anti-U.S. attacks in Libya is the administration’s policy of arming jihadists to overthrow Mideast governments. But in the case of Libya, the arming of jihadists may have directly resulted in the Sept. 11, 2012, attacks against the U.S. consulate in Benghazi and the subsequent murder of Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens, Foreign Service Information Management Officer Sean Smith, private security employees and former U.S. Navy SEALs Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods.

After changing its story multiple times, the White House finally conceded the deadly assault on the U.S. consulate was a planned attack linked to al-Qaida, as per information released by national intelligence agencies.

The admission prompted Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., to call for the resignation of U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice for pushing the narrative that the attacks were part of a spontaneous uprising.

King may instead want to focus his investigative energies on the larger story: How the Obama administration armed Libyan rebels who were known to include al-Qaida and other anti-Western jihadists, and how the White House is currently continuing that same policy in Syria.

During the revolution against Muammar Gadhafi’s regime, the U.S. admitted to directly arming the rebel groups.

At the time, rebel leader Abdel-Hakim al-Hasidi boasted in an interview that a significant number of the Libyan rebels were al-Qaida gunmen, many of whom had fought U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Hasidi insisted his fighters “are patriots and good Muslims, not terrorists,” but he added that the “members of al-Qaida are also good Muslims and are fighting against the invader.”

Even Adm. James Stavridis, NATO supreme commander for Europe, admitted during the Libyan revolution that Libya’s rebel force may include al-Qaida: “We have seen flickers in the intelligence of potential al-Qaida, Hezbollah.”

At the time, former CIA officer Bruce Riedel went even further, telling the Hindustan Times: “There is no question that al-Qaida’s Libyan franchise, Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, is a part of the opposition. It has always been Gadhafi’s biggest enemy and its stronghold is Benghazi.

What is unclear is how much of the opposition is al-Qaida/Libyan Islamic Fighting Group – 2 percent or 80 percent.”

The arming of the Libyan rebels may have aided in the attacks on our consulate in Libya. One witness to those attacks said some of the gunmen attacking the U.S. installation had identified themselves as members of Ansar al-Shariah, which represents al-Qaida in Yemen and Libya.

The al-Qaida offshoot released a statement denying its members were behind the deadly attack, but a man identified as a leader of the Ansar brigade told Al Jazeera the group indeed took part in the Benghazi attack.

Ambassador Stevens was directly involved in arming the rebels, reported Egyptian security officials speaking to WND. Those officials claimed Stevens played a central role in recruiting jihadists to fight Bashar al-Assad’s regime in Syria.

The officials further claimed Stevens served as a key contact with the Saudis to coordinate the recruitment by Saudi Arabia of Islamic fighters from North Africa and Libya. The jihadists were sent to Syria via Turkey to attack Assad’s forces, said the security officials.

The Egyptian security officials said Stevens also worked with the Saudis to send names of potential jihadi recruits to U.S. security organizations for review. Names found to be directly involved in previous attacks against the U.S., including in Iraq and Afghanistan, were ultimately not recruited by the Saudis to fight in Syria, said the officials.

Regardless of Stevens’ alleged role, the Obama administration now continues to support the Syrian rebels, including the Free Syrian Army, despite widespread reports that al-Qaida is prominent among their ranks.

In addition to a reported $450 million in emergency cash for the Muslim Brotherhood-led Egyptian government, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Friday announced $45 million in additional aid for Syrian the opposition after nearly $100 million was provided to the Syrian rebels this year.

The problem? Last month, WND quoted a senior Syrian source claiming at lease 500 hardcore mujahedeen from Afghanistan, many of whom were spearheading efforts to fight the U.S. there, were killed in clashes with Syrian forces last month.

Also last month, WND reported Jihadiya Salafia in the Gaza Strip, a group that represents al-Qaida in the coastal territory, had declared three days of mourning for its own jihadists who died in Syria in recent weeks.

WND reported in May there was growing collaboration between the Syrian opposition and al-Qaida, as well as evidence the opposition is sending weapons to jihadists in Iraq, according to an Egyptian security official.

The military official said that Egypt has reports of collaboration between the Syrian opposition and three al-Qaida arms, including one the operates in Libya:

Jund al-Sham, which is made up of al-Qaida militants who are Syrian, Palestinian and Lebanese;

Jund al-Islam, which in recent years merged with Ansar al-Islam, an extremist group of Sunni Iraqis operating under the al-Qaida banner and operating in Yemen and Libya;

Jund Ansar al-Allah, an al-Qaida group based in Gaza linked to Palestinian camps in Lebanon and Syria.

U.S. officials have stated the White House is providing nonlethal aid to the Syrian rebels, while widespread reports have claimed the U.S. has been working with Arab countries to ensure the opposition in Syria is well armed.

House Oversight and Government Reform Committee leaders today sent a letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton asking why requests for more protection were denied to the U.S. mission in Libya by Washington officials prior to the September 11, 2012 terrorist attack that killed U.S. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens. The denials came after repeated attacks and security threats to U.S. personnel.

“Based on information provided to the Committee by individuals with direct knowledge of events in Libya, the attack that claimed the ambassador’s life was the latest in a long line of attacks on Western diplomats and officials in Libya in the months leading up to September 11, 2012. It was clearly never, as Administration officials once insisted, the result of a popular protest,” the committee’s chairman, Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., and subcommittee chairman, Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, write. “In addition, multiple U.S. federal government officials have confirmed to the Committee that, prior to the September 11 attack, the U.S. mission in Libya made repeated requests for increased security in Benghazi. The mission in Libya, however, was denied these resources by officials in Washington.”

The letter outlines 13 security threats over the six months prior to the attack.

“Put together, these events indicated a clear pattern of security threats that could only be reasonably interpreted to justify increased security for U.S. personnel and facilities in Benghazi,” the chairmen write.

The Committee indicated it intends to convene a hearing in Washington on Wednesday October 10, 2012, on the security failures that preceded the attack.

Vincent

10-02-2012, 05:04 PM

No, the "administration" was too busy falling all over itself to bring the creators of a Youtube video before the court of world opinion to deal with the reality that they had allowed an American embassy to be overrun and its ambassador raped, murdered, then raped again.

By obsessing over the 14-minute YouTube Muhammad video and its maker, the mainstream media ultimately exonerates the inexcusable and murderous response of the Islamic world.

There is only one question: did those who make this movie break any law? No, they did not—and so the matter should end there, and the media should move on. Focusing on those who did not break any American laws as a way to take the focus off those who murdered and initiated an act of war against the United States is not only misleading; it validates and gives Islamic blasphemy laws precedence over American freedoms.

Moreover, even if making movies deemed offensive to Muslims was illegal in the U.S., the fact is, these embassy attacks, which "coincidentally" began on September 11, have nothing to do with the movie. On September 10, I wrote an article titled "Jihadis Threaten to Burn U.S. Embassy in Cairo." Then, the demand that the U.S. release its imprisoned jihadis, including the Blind Sheikh, was behind these threats. There was no mention of "offensive movies." My source, El Fagr, an Arabic website, reported all this on September 8.

In other words, several days before Muslims rioted about this movie they were threatening to burn down the U.S. embassy in Cairo. I had even seen sporadic Arabic reports, from months back, talking about "extremist elements" threatening the embassy. The movie is just a pretext—aided and abetted by the media, not to mention the Obama administration: Hillary Clinton called the video "disgusting and reprehensible," wording which is more befitting for those who murdered (and possibly raped, see below) Americans; the U.S. embassy itself apologized over those who "hurt the religious feelings of Muslims"; and the administration asked YouTube to remove the 14 minute trailer.

Seventy-year old, retiring Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., put it well, when he suggested that the administration's response to the embassy attacks was akin to a court asking a rape victim for an apology: "It's like the judge telling the woman who got raped, 'You asked for it because of the way you dressed.'"

Nor is the rape analogy entirely allegorical. According to the Arabic website, Tayyar, "the American ambassador in Libya [Christopher Stevens] was sexually raped before being killed by the gunmen who stormed the embassy building in Benghazi last night [Tuesday, September 11], in protestation of a film insulting to the Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings upon him."

http://www.raymondibrahim.com/ibrahim/pics/large/235.jpg

Sexual abuse and degradation is a common tactic used against non-Muslims, especially women, as the repeatedly raped Lara Logan found. A report in Arabic media that just appeared discusses how Christian women—identified by wearing crosses around their necks or simply not wearing a hijab—are subject to sexual harassment, verbal abuse, and even threats of rape on the streets of Egypt. This has only "become much more blatant and terrifying [after the embassy attacks]—and has even reached the point of threats of genocide and purging the land of Egypt of infidel Christians," writes one female Christian in Egypt.

Nor are men immune from such rapes. In fact, the photos of Ambassador Steven—stripped clothes, bloodied and tortured right before he was killed—very much resemble the photos of Gaddafi right before he was killed. One U.S.-supported "freedom-fighter," for example, can be seen sodomizing Gadaffi with a rod as others dragged him along.

The al-Qaeda affiliated men who sexually abused and killed Gaddafi are the same sort of men who sexually abused and killed America's ambassador. We were told that the late Libyan dictator was killed because he was an evil oppressor of his people. Why was the American ambassador killed, who had hailed the revolution and was there helping to "build a better Libya"?

These are the questions the media and the Obama administration need to be answering—not obsessing over a second-rate YouTube video and questioning hard won American freedoms enshrined in the First Amendment. They should be explaining why it is that, after four years of appeasing the Islamic world in ways unprecedented, including by helping oust America's longstanding allies like Egypt's Mubarak to empower Islamists, all we have to show for it are dead and violated Americans, stormed embassies, burned U.S. flags, and greater anti-American sentiment than ever before.

Vincent

10-02-2012, 05:12 PM

Film at 11.

http://hillbuzz.org/breaking-news-tw...to-libya-64291
Two sources in Chicago diplomatic circles identify Ambassador Chris Stevens as gay
(meaning State Department sent gay man to be ambassador to Libya)
September 14, 2012 by Kevin DuJan

[ Ambassador Chris Stevens in the 70s with male companion Austin Tichenor, whose Facebook profile has been displaying photos and remembrances of Stevens the last few days including references to the gay-themed novel "Brideshead Revisited" whose main characters were star-crossed, doomed lovers "Sebastian" and "Charles"...which is not a far cry from the names "Austin" and "Chris", as some of Austin's friends have noted on Facebook. ]

Programming Note: listen to a special radio report on this developing story via the HillBuzz & Mrs. Fox Show, archived from 9/14/2012– click HERE to listen

Today I went out into the field here in Chicago looking to talk to some of the striking teachers but no one in a red-shirt was anywhere to be found (or, if they were wearing one, they had nothing to do with the teachers’ union strike). A journalist friend of mine asked me to nose around and see if I could uncover anything about slain Ambassador Chris Stevens, who was rumored to be gay. A former “roommate” of Stevens by the name of Austin Tichenor lives and works in Chicago and while making calls to friends of mine in the theater world who know him I also thought to check some sources with the city who deal with the State Department and foreign dignitaries when they are in town.

Of course, they’ve all been talking about Ambassador Stevens’ murder by Muslims in Libya: and all of them are incredulous that the State Department sent a gay man to be ambassador to a Muslim country. News reports continue to indicate that the Muslims who murdered Stevens also raped him repeatedly, before and after his death.

I was told by friends in the City’s protocol office to go over to the Second Story Bar in downtown Chicago, just off Michigan Avenue, because it’s where a lot of gay guys who work for both the city and the consulates go after work. Chicago is home to a great number of consulates, including the Polish, Chinese, and Serbian consulates amongst others. I happened to luck out when the bartender working, who is a friend, tipped me off that a man in a suit talking to some other foreign-looking types worked at the Serbian consulate a few doors up the street towards the lake.

Second Story Bar is literally on the second floor of a nondescript building whose ground level houses some sort of Thai restaurant. A psychic’s office is prominently advertised on the door leading to a steep flight of stairs and a blank green steel door that hides the tucked-away bar. The place has the feel of a speakeasy, with exposed bricks and battered plaster on the walls and an oddball collection of black and white photographs and pig-themed folk art scattered over drinkers’ heads in any exposed space.

I’m forever perplexed that actual reporters don’t camp out in these sorts of places because great scoops are very easy to find if you just go in there and ask questions. The Serbian consulate employee identified himself to me as “Dino” and wouldn’t give me any more of a name than that, but told me it was no secret that Chris Stevens was gay and that “it was stupid to send him to Libya as the ambassador when he was a known homosexual”.

Dino explained in great detail that the brutal sodomizing of Stevens’ corpse was something that Muslims do to show the “utmost disrespect to the body” and that this is “a great insult in Islam” reserved for homosexuals. ”It is like making him a woman in death and he will be a woman now after life” the Serbian explained to me. There’s a good chance this guy was Muslim too, and gay, which makes my head spin more than a little since he seemed to have no anger at all in his voice that Muslims in Libya assassinated the American ambassador and then sodomized his corpse.

“He should not have gone there” was the general consensus from this man.

You won’t hear any of this in the media, no doubt, but in Chicago’s diplomatic circles at least there is no doubt that Chris Stevens was gay and that pretty much anyone in the diplomatic world knew that. That includes the Libyans who were hired as security at the consulate in Benghazi who betrayed Ambassador Stevens and assisted in his murder.

Meanwhile, the White House is ignoring the fact that a gay ambassador to a Muslim country was murdered and they are in fact still pretending that all of this is about some obscure movie about Muhammad and has nothing at all to do with Barack Obama repeatedly and vociferously spiking the football over killing Osama bin Laden (which took place all throughout the Democrats’ convention last week).

Film at 11.
Two sources in Chicago diplomatic circles identify Ambassador Chris Stevens as gay
(meaning State Department sent gay man to be ambassador to Libya)

Yeah - i guess if he was gay and was an ambassador then the State Department sent a gay man to be an ambassador - thanks for connecting the dots there.

So does this mean Ambassador Stevens had it coming to him?

If not, what do you find so sensational about his sexuality that brings out the big fonts and bright colors?

Should the Obama Administration have known better than to send a gay person to be an ambassador to a nation where Islam is practiced? :noidea:

Vis

10-02-2012, 07:19 PM

Yeah - i guess if he was gay and was an ambassador then the State Department sent a gay man to be an ambassador - thanks for connecting the dots there.

So does this mean Ambassador Stevens had it coming to him?

If not, what do you find so sensational about his sexuality that brings out the big fonts and bright colors?

Should the Obama Administration have known better than to send a gay person to be an ambassador to a nation where Islam is practiced? :noidea:

Hating gays in Vincent's big contribution everywhere he goes.

Vincent

10-02-2012, 07:39 PM

Yeah - i guess if he was gay and was an ambassador then the State Department sent a gay man to be an ambassador - thanks for connecting the dots there.

So does this mean Ambassador Stevens had it coming to him?

If not, what do you find so sensational about his sexuality that brings out the big fonts and bright colors?

Should the Obama Administration have known better than to send a gay person to be an ambassador to a nation where Islam is practiced? :noidea:

Can't get anything past you Dan. Right up there with previous administrations sending April Glaspie to Baghdad.

BTW, every article I have ever posted has the title in 6 point navy.

Hating gays in Vincent's big contribution everywhere he goes.

Vincent doesn't hate anybody but terrorists, sweet cheeks. We've been over this endlessly. But if you derive some sort of comfort from calling people that disagree with you haters, knock yourself out.

tony hipchest

10-02-2012, 07:54 PM

c'mon guys...

im kinda enjoying vincent trying to feign the disgust that goes along with his haetriotic vitrol. its almost as if he is championing the gay ambassadors cause. :hatsoff:

im sure we can all safely say that in his mind the only good gay is a dead gay, the only good muslim, is a dead muslim, and the only good liberal, is a dead liberal (am i missing any groups that draw his ire?). how they die is irrelevent and if they kill eachother is just gravy.

i hope he doesnt stick his head in a microwave with that tin foil hat on. gas ovens are just fine.

Atlanta Dan

10-02-2012, 08:57 PM

Can't get anything past you Dan. Right up there with previous administrations sending April Glaspie to Baghdad.

Oh - so you were serious? I was unaware of your deep respect for Islamic cultural preferences

So I guess it also is a mistake to send a woman who is Secretary of State on diplomatic missions to patriarchal societies (given your deep respect for local preferences on those sorts of matters)

But i can see why we have to take your news sources seriously after I found this story on the same site as the "Stevens was gay" story to which you linked

Is Barack Obama Gay?

What’s Barack Obama hiding…and what is the Left going to such lengths to keep hidden?

Could it all boil down to something as simple as Barack Obama being gay?

Is THAT what all the enigma, subterfuge, and Alinsky Goon Squad assaults are all really about?

Is Barack Obama our first down-low, closeted gay President and is Michelle Antoinette Obama our first fully-complicit “beard” of a First Lady?

http://hillbuzz.org/is-barack-obama-gay

Vincent

10-02-2012, 09:47 PM

Oh - so you were serious? I was unaware of your deep respect for Islamic cultural preferences

So I guess it also is a mistake to send a woman who is Secretary of State on diplomatic missions to patriarchal societies (given your deep respect for local preferences on those sorts of matters)

But i can see why we have to take your news sources seriously after I found this story on the same site as the "Stevens was gay" story to which you linked

Is Barack Obama Gay?

What’s Barack Obama hiding…and what is the Left going to such lengths to keep hidden?

Could it all boil down to something as simple as Barack Obama being gay?

Is THAT what all the enigma, subterfuge, and Alinsky Goon Squad assaults are all really about?

Is Barack Obama our first down-low, closeted gay President and is Michelle Antoinette Obama our first fully-complicit “beard” of a First Lady?

http://hillbuzz.org/is-barack-obama-gay

Serious about what? That it isn't a good idea to send female or gay representation to inbred societies that deify a 7th century drooling demoniac and abuser of women and children? They don't respect them as evidenced by what they did to Lara Logan (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1381710/Lara-Logan-reveals-terrifying-details-mob-sexual-assault-Egypt.html) and Ambassador Stevens.

A gay Kenyan? Imagine that. Everybody in Chicago knows he can change a nine dollar bill with threes. Aside that he's the "president" and lives a sham, who cares? He's done far more destruction to this Republic than any fallout from that in diplomatic circles.

Perhaps you missed the two articles that preceded the reportage on Ambassador Stevens. Hidden in them is the actual story. Ambassador Stevens' proclivities are a related aside. You are able to see the association, aren't you Dan?

See, it isn't that the Kenyan sends women or gays to do our bidding with the droooler's hordes, although that speaks volumes as to his disrespect for same. Its that he has handed the only vestige of stability in the Mideast, aside from Israel, and the only "partner to peace" to quote Jimmuh Earl, to the enemy. He has deliberately destroyed the work toward peace in the Mideast of half a dozen administrations. He has deliberately put Israel in peril. He spits in their eyes at every opportunity. He ignored calls from his ambassadors for assistance. He allowed sovereign American ground to be overrun by the terrorists he equipped, then set his "administration" about covering it up. Treason. Serial treason. Serial premeditated treason.

He may or may not face judgment and its penalty for it in this life. I'm certain he will in the hereafter.

And for the record, I have nothing but contempt for anything and everything islamic as it is satanic in its entirety.

Fire Haley

10-03-2012, 04:19 AM

State Dep't Rejects Call for UN Ambassador to Quit

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Obama administration on Monday rejected a demand from a senior Republican lawmaker that the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations to resign.

Rep. Peter King of New York said last week Susan Rice's explanation of the Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, was a foreign policy failure.

He told CNN that Rice — a possible candidate for secretary of state if President Barack Obama wins re-election — should resign for comments she made five days after the attack saying the evidence gathered at that point indicated it was not a premeditated or coordinated strike.

Officials now say it was a planned terrorist attack distinct from the mob protests in the Arab world over a U.S.-made Internet video ridiculing Islam

of course Obama wishes his failure won't be tied to his State Department - it's still a huge blunder in his support of his Arab Spring Muslim Brotherhood jihadist buddies

Atlanta Dan

10-03-2012, 10:33 AM

Serious about what? That it isn't a good idea to send female or gay representation to inbred societies that deify a 7th century drooling demoniac and abuser of women and children? They don't respect them as evidenced by what they did to Lara Logan (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1381710/Lara-Logan-reveals-terrifying-details-mob-sexual-assault-Egypt.html) and Ambassador Stevens.

A gay Kenyan? Imagine that. Everybody in Chicago knows he can change a nine dollar bill with threes. Aside that he's the "president" and lives a sham, who cares? He's done far more destruction to this Republic than any fallout from that in diplomatic circles.

Perhaps you missed the two articles that preceded the reportage on Ambassador Stevens. Hidden in them is the actual story. Ambassador Stevens' proclivities are a related aside. You are able to see the association, aren't you Dan?

See, it isn't that the Kenyan sends women or gays to do our bidding with the droooler's hordes, although that speaks volumes as to his disrespect for same. Its that he has handed the only vestige of stability in the Mideast, aside from Israel, and the only "partner to peace" to quote Jimmuh Earl, to the enemy. He has deliberately destroyed the work toward peace in the Mideast of half a dozen administrations. He has deliberately put Israel in peril. He spits in their eyes at every opportunity. He ignored calls from his ambassadors for assistance. He allowed sovereign American ground to be overrun by the terrorists he equipped, then set his "administration" about covering it up. Treason. Serial treason. Serial premeditated treason.

He may or may not face judgment and its penalty for it in this life. I'm certain he will in the hereafter.

And for the record, I have nothing but contempt for anything and everything islamic as it is satanic in its entirety.

Vincent - unlike some bitter enders on the right who see no evil when it comes to their political party of choice I admit that the death of ambassador Stevens and the shifting explanations for how it occurred is a total cluster.

But the idea that Obama has destroyed a framework for stability that previous management left to him is ludicrous - since the Romney campaign is littered with the neo-cons that masterminded our foreign policy under previous management I will take my chances with keeping those folks out of power

MACH1

10-03-2012, 11:07 AM

Because the incompetent fools that are running the circus now are all that and a bag of fries.

Even John Kerry is smart enough to know somethings up. And Kerry knows all about cover ups.

Our own Sen. John Kerry (D) has called for a State Department investigation into embassy security, which would appear beyond pointless except as an attempt to forestall a congressional investigation. (The State Department apparently knew of security risks since June 6, when militants first attacked the consulate with a homemade bomb.) Kerry told The New York Times
http://www.bostonherald.com/news/opinion/editorials/view/20221002the_cover-up_continues/

Atlanta Dan

10-03-2012, 11:52 AM

Because the incompetent fools that are running the circus now are all that and a bag of fries.

Even John Kerry is smart enough to know somethings up. And Kerry knows all about cover ups.

The Iraq war and its aftermath, predicated upon lies about weapons of mass destruction, is the leader in the clubhouse for worst U.S. foreign policy debacle since Vietnam - are you really contending the murder of Ambassador Stevens is in the same solar system when it comes to compromising the strategic interests of the U.S.?

Surely you are not contending the Iraq war turned out pretty well, with a government highly sympathetic to Iran now in place in Iraq

And if you think the answer to that problem is to go to war with Iran be careful what you wish for

P.S. - the "failed" sanctions policy has caused the Iranian curency to lose 40% of its value in the last week - too bad we did not start a war instead and blow up the global oil market

Vincent

10-03-2012, 02:13 PM

The Iraq war and its aftermath, predicated upon lies about weapons of mass destruction, is the leader in the clubhouse for worst U.S. foreign policy debacle since Vietnam - are you really contending the murder of Ambassador Stevens is in the same solar system when it comes to compromising the strategic interests of the U.S.?

All WMDs were moved to Syria by the Russians before our invasion. None less than Israel's prime minister, Ariel Sharon stated so on Dec. 23, 2002, "Chemical and biological weapons which Saddam is endeavoring to conceal have been moved from Iraq to Syria." Yevgeni Primakov, you may recall that name, oversaw 56 flights of WMDs from Iraq to Syria under the guise of “relief flights”. I have 24 articles in my archives ranging from 2003 to 2010 to support that. But feel free to buy, hook, line and sinker, everything the media feeds you.

Yer boy clinton was rattling his saber and threatening Iraq over WMDs before Bush even ran in a primary. Clinton had a green light through a resolution but didn’t pull the trigger.

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
--President Bill Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
--President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

And all of his circle were in full agreement…

"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
--Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
-- Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
--Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

Had gore won, in a post 9/11 world, we would have invaded…

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
-- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
-- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

Clinton had the support of dem congressional leadership…

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by:
-- Democratic Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others, Oct. 9, 1998

"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
--Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), and others, Dec 5, 2001

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
-Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998

"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them."
-- Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
-- Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force -- if necessary -- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
-- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do"
-- Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
-- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..."
-- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003

Surely you are not contending the Iraq war turned out pretty well, with a government highly sympathetic to Iran now in place in Iraq

No it didn’t. Just as the enemy turned public opinion in the Viet Nam war that lead to our withdrawal, history repeats. Iraq should be the base in Asia we intended it to be along with a subdued Afghanistan hemming in Iran. But a prominent muslim @#$%ed that up.

And if you think the answer to that problem is to go to war with Iran be careful what you wish for

The Israelis will crush iran. Film at 11.

P.S. - the "failed" sanctions policy has caused the Iranian curency to lose 40% of its value in the last week - too bad we did not start a war instead and blow up the global oil market

And so that means what? That iran will capitulate? You may recall that the world sanctioned saddam until the point that they all agreed it was useless. Then we all agreed to invade.

You must have been young at the time to have such a distorted perspective.

tony hipchest

10-03-2012, 04:19 PM

just wondering...

is the murder of our ambassador the "mother of all terrorist strikes" all the righties were guaranteeing would happen if obama were elected president?

Fire Haley

10-03-2012, 04:45 PM

face it - the whole "Arab Spring" thing blew up in Obama's face and the State Department was involved in covering up their colossal blunder in backing the Muslim Brotherhood and de-stabilizing the whole M.E.

U.S. had early indications Libya attack tied to organized militants

.(Reuters) - Within hours of last month's attacks on U.S. diplomatic facilities in Benghazi, Libya, President Barack Obama's administration received about a dozen intelligence reports suggesting militants connected to al Qaeda were involved, three government sources said.

Despite these reports, in public statements and private meetings, top U.S. officials spent nearly two weeks highlighting intelligence suggesting that the attacks were spontaneous protests against an anti-Muslim film, while playing down the involvement of organized militant groups.

It was not until last Friday that Director of National Intelligence James Clapper's office issued an unusual public statement, which described how the picture that intelligence agencies presented to U.S. policymakers had "evolved" into an acknowledgement that the attacks were "deliberate and organized" and "carried out by extremists."

The Iraq war and its aftermath, predicated upon lies about weapons of mass destruction, is the leader in the clubhouse for worst U.S. foreign policy debacle since Vietnam - are you really contending the murder of Ambassador Stevens is in the same solar system when it comes to compromising the strategic interests of the U.S.?

Surely you are not contending the Iraq war turned out pretty well, with a government highly sympathetic to Iran now in place in Iraq

And if you think the answer to that problem is to go to war with Iran be careful what you wish for

P.S. - the "failed" sanctions policy has caused the Iranian curency to lose 40% of its value in the last week - too bad we did not start a war instead and blow up the global oil market

Fall back to the old tired bu, bu, bu bush blame game.

Incompetent bunch of fools!

MasterOfPuppets

10-03-2012, 07:24 PM

face it - the whole "Arab Spring" thing blew up in Obama's face and the State Department was involved in covering up their colossal blunder in backing the Muslim Brotherhood and de-stabilizing the whole M.E.

U.S. had early indications Libya attack tied to organized militants

.(Reuters) - Within hours of last month's attacks on U.S. diplomatic facilities in Benghazi, Libya, President Barack Obama's administration received about a dozen intelligence reports suggesting militants connected to al Qaeda were involved, three government sources said.

Despite these reports, in public statements and private meetings, top U.S. officials spent nearly two weeks highlighting intelligence suggesting that the attacks were spontaneous protests against an anti-Muslim film, while playing down the involvement of organized militant groups.

It was not until last Friday that Director of National Intelligence James Clapper's office issued an unusual public statement, which described how the picture that intelligence agencies presented to U.S. policymakers had "evolved" into an acknowledgement that the attacks were "deliberate and organized" and "carried out by extremists."

Unless i missed the memo where you were screaming for Bush and Cheney to be impeached for lying and war crimes it would appear to be a bit hypocritical to say Obama must go

It is fine to throw rocks at Obama, but consider the alternative - as Bill Clinton said it better than I could

n Tampa, the Republican argument against the President's re-election was pretty simple: we left him a total mess, he hasn't cleaned it up fast enough, so fire him and put us back in.

With regard to me blaming Bush, not quite - i am saying take a look at who is advising Romney on foreign policy and will be back in charge if Romney wins

The Bushies are back, and playing for Romney

Particularly striking is the degree to which Bush 43 foreign policy players have assumed leading roles in shaping policy for Romney. John Bolton, Bush’s U.N. ambassador and an especially combative member of the neoconservative contingent so closely linked with that administration, has been part of Romney’s inner circle throughout the year.

Cofer Black, a former top executive at the Bush-era security contractor once called Blackwater, is a top adviser to Romney on intelligence issues, shaping his views on subjects such as interrogations of terrorism suspects. And Dan Senor, who was a top official in the Coalition Provisional Authority in Iraq in the year after the invasion, is now at the right hand of vice presidential nominee Paul Ryan. Senor was also cited as one of the influential thinkers behind some of Romney’s controversial comments during his trip to Israel, when he said the innate superiority of Israeli culture is one reason the Israelis are doing better economically than the Palestinians.

Myy pology - I confused you with Killer's start to the thread:hatsoff:

Point still stands - claiming the Obama crew is dumber than W and friends is contradicted by the body of work by prior management

Fire Haley

10-04-2012, 01:50 PM

If he can't take the heat from Romney, no wonder he lets foreign leaders roll him like a barrel.

Vincent

10-11-2012, 01:05 PM

Should the Obama Administration have known better than to send a gay person to be an ambassador to a nation where Islam is practiced? :noidea:

Oh, I don't know Dan. In light of what has been learned in the aftermath, what do you think?

You can argue social agendas here in the land of the free and the home of the brave. But we have learned that its not a good idea to send homosexuals to a country that outlaws LGBTs. You really have to call into account an administration that gives preference to "same sex" applicants for any job anywhere, much worse diplomatic posts, much worse protection of diplomats, much worse, in countries hostile to them.

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/us-e...erence-citizen
U.S. Embassy in Libya Sought $13,000-Per-Year Bodyguards With ‘Limited’ English; But Gave Preference to Citizen ‘Same-Sex Domestic Partners’ of U.S. Gov’t Employees
By Terence P. Jeffrey
October 10, 2012

(CNSNews.com) - In the months leading up to the Sept. 11 terrorist attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, the U.S. Embassy in Libya was seeking to hire two bodyguards with “limited” English language skills at salaries of about $13,000 per year.

Job descriptions for these openings that the U.S. Embassy in Libya posted online said the State Department would give preference in filling them to qualified U.S. citizens who were family members of U.S. government employees.

The job descriptions explicitly stated that this included the “same-sex domestic partners” of U.S. government employees.

In addition to the two bodyguards, the U.S. Embassy in Tripoli, Libya was also seeking a security guard, a surveillance detection specialist, a chauffeur for the consulate in Benghazi and a “Senior Guard” for the Local Guard Force working to secure the embassy.

Embed » One of the duties of the Local Guard Force that this Senior Guard would join was “providing limited emergency response in the event of a terrorist attack, criminal incident, or major accident.”

All the job descriptions for these positions were posted online by the embassy, and all, except the security guard position, said that applicants needed to be fluent in Arabic. None required full fluency in English. All of them said the State Department would give preference in filling the position to a qualified U.S. citizen who was the “same-sex domestic partner” of a U.S. government employee.

Four of the six job descriptions—the two bodyguards, the security guard and the surveillance detection specialist—listed the salaries being offered for the positions. The highest was 16,288 Libyan dinars per year for the bodyguard positions (if the successful applicant came in at “full performance level” and not “training level”). At the current exchange rate (1 Libyan dinar to 0.80225 U.S. dollars), that works out to about $13,000 per year. (In 2010, according to the CIA's World Factbook Libya's per capita GPD was $14,100.)

Each of the security-related job descriptions that the U.S. Embassy in Libya posted online included this disclaimer: “When fully qualified, U.S. Citizen Eligible Family Members (USEFM) and US Veterans are given preference.” All the descriptions defined an Eligible Family Member as follows: "1. Eligible Family Member (EFM): An individual related to a U.S. government employee in one of the following ways: Spouse or same-sex domestic partner (as defined in 3 FAM 1610); ..." They then defined U.S. Citizen Eligible Family Member as follows: "2. U.S. Citizen Eligible Family Member (USEFM): For purposes of receiving preference in hiring for a qualified position, an EFM who meet the following criteria: US Cititzen; and EFM (see above) at least 18 years old; ..."

The U.S. Embassy also posted—in both English and Arabic--copies of a standard State Department application form. Block 19 of this application asks the applicant to list any “relatives” or “members of your household” who work for the U.S. government. Section 20 asks the applicant if he or she is “claiming preference in hiring” as, among other things, a U.S. Eligible Family Member.

The form includes instructions for completing Block 19. These instructions say: “Relatives and members of household include father, mother, husband, wife, unmarried partner of the opposite or same sex…” The instructions for completing Block 20 say that USEFMs are deemed to include a U.S. citizen who is a “spouse or domestic partner of the sponsoring employee.”

The U.S. State Department has long given hiring preferences to Eligible Family Members (EFM) of foreign services officers posted overseas--as long as the EFM is a U.S. citizen and is fully qualified for the job opening in question. In June 2009, however, President Barack Obama and Secretary State Hillary Clinton expanded this policy to treat the unmarried same-sex partners of foreign service officers as if they were their legal spouses.

“In consultation with Secretary of State Clinton, as well as OPM Director John Berry, my administration has completed a long and thorough review to identify a number of areas where we can extend federal benefits to the same-sex partners of Foreign Service and executive branch government employees,” Obama said at a White House ceremony on June 17, 2009, when he signed a "memorandum" instituting the new policy.

“I’m requesting that Secretary Clinton and Director Berry do so where possible under existing law—and that the heads of all executive departments and agencies conduct reviews to determine where they may do the same,” said Obama.

The next day, Secretary of State Clinton issued a statement announcing the policy changes she was implementing under Obama’s memorandum.

“Domestic partners of federal employees have for too long been treated unequally,” said Clinton. “As one of my first acts as secretary, I directed the department to review whether we had the flexibility to extend additional benefits to domestic partners.

“Yesterday, the president issued a memorandum reflecting his commitment to ensuring that same-sex domestic partners receive the maximum benefits that each agency legally can undertake,” said Clinton. “I am pleased to announce that the Department of State is extending the full range of legally available benefits and allowances to same-sex domestic partners of members of the Foreign Service sent to serve abroad.”

The State Department later elaborated on the new policy in a guidebook it publishes for the family members of new foreign service officers.

“As of June 19, 2009, the Department of State extended the full range of legally available benefits and allowances to declared same-sex domestic partners of members of the Foreign Service sent to serve abroad,” the handbook said. “The Department also will work with foreign governments to provide same-sex domestic partners diplomatic visas, privileges and immunities, and authorization to work in the local economy.”

Despite this new policy, not all of the U.S. embassies in predominantly Muslim countries spell out in their online job descriptions the fact that the same-sex domestic partners of U.S. government employees will be given a hiring preference.

For example, the U.S. Embassy in Egypt does post the State Department application form in both English and Arabic, but the online job descriptions it has currently posted do not say that the same-sex domestic partners of U.S. government employees get a hiring preference.

They do say that the “US Mission in Cairo provides equal opportunity and fair and equitable treatment in employment to all people without regard to race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, disability, political affiliation, marital status, or sexual orientation.” And they do say: “When equally qualified, U.S. Citizen Eligible Family Members (AEFMs) and U.S. Veterans will be given preference."

But then the U.S. Embassy in Egypt’s online job descriptions define an “AEFM” as follows: “AEFM: A type of EFM that is eligible for direct hire employment on either a Family Member Appointment (FMA) or Temporary Appointment (TEMP) provided s/he meets all of the following criteria: U.S. citizen; Spouse or dependent who is at least age 18.”

The U.S. Embassy in Egypt currently has eight online descriptions posted for job openings ranging for a “Financial/Administrative Assistant” to a “gardener.” The term “same-sex domestic partner”—which appears even in the job descriptions for bodyguards and security guards posted by the U.S. Embassy in Libya—does not appear in any of the job descriptions posted by the U.S. Embassy in Egypt.

By contrast, four descriptions for job openings posted by the U.S. Embassy in Yemen—including two protective detail trainers and two cultural assistants—do include the same language about a hiring preference extending to “same-sex domestic partners” that is in the job descriptions posted in Libya.

Earlier this week, the U.S. Embassy in Yemen had also posted a job description for a “guard receptionist” that included language indicating a preference would be given to the U.S. citizen “same-sex domestic partner” of a U.S. government employee. This job description also said: “Female candidates are encourage [sic] to apply.”

On Oct. 2 House Oversight and Government Reform Chairman Darrell Issa and Rep. Jason Chaffetz, chairman of the Oversight and Government Reform Subcommittee on National Security, sent a letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton citing what they called “a long line of attacks on Western diplomats and officials in Libya in the months leading up to September 11, 2012,” when terrorists attacked the U.S. consulate in Benghazi and killed the U.S. ambassador and three other Americans.

“It was clearly never, as administration officials once insisted, the result of a popular protest,” Issa and Chaffetz wrote Clinton. “In addition, multiple U.S. federal government officials have confirmed to the committee that, prior to the September 11 attack, the U.S. mission in Libya made repeated requests for increased security in Benghazi. The mission in Libya, however, was denied these resources by officials in Washinton.”

One of the attack cited by Issa and Chaffetz occurred on April 6 in Benghazi.

“Two Libyans who had been fired from a contractor providing unarmed static security for Consulate Benghazi, threw a small IED over the Consulate fence,” Issa and Chaffetz wrote in their letter to Clinton. “There were no casualties or damage and the suspects were arrested but not prosecuted.”

Another attack occurred on June 6. “Under cover of darkness, assailants placed an IED on the north gate of Consulate Benghazi, blowing a hole in the security perimeter that was described by one individual as ‘big enough for forty men to go through.’”

One of the bodyguard job openings listed on the website of the U.S. Embassy in Libya, said the opening date for applications was April 2, four days before the first attack on the Benghazi consulate by two fired Libyan security guards.

“The U.S. Embassy in Tripoli is seeking an individual for the position of Bodyguard in the Regional Security Section,” said the job description. “Close Protection Unit (CPU) bodyguards are responsible for providing a safe and secure environment for the conduct of foreign policy.

Body guards are responsible for protecting COM [Chief of Mission] personnel and official visitors from physical harm and embarrassment.”

What were the qualifications for this position? According to the description, the person needed to have completed secondary school, have “a minimum of six months security, police or military experience,” have “Level IV (Fluency)” in “reading, writing and speaking Arabic,” and “Level II (Limited)" skills "in reading, writing and speaking English.”

The description, like the others on the U.S. Embassy Libya website, then said that qualified “US Citizen Eligible Family Members (USEFMs) and U.S. Veterans are given preference,” and explained that a USEFM included the spouse “or same-sex domestic partner …. of the sponsoring employee.”

The other job description for a bodyguard that the embassy posted listed the same salary and qualifications, but said the opening date for the job was Jan. 2, 2012.

The “surveillance detection specialist” job description said the applicant needed to have completed secondary school, have one or two years of “security or military experience,” and be fluent in Arabic while having a “Level III (Good working knowledge) in reading, writing and speaking English.” The opening date for this job was June 11, 2012.

The job description for the surveillance protection specialist said: “Provides security for USG facilities, employees, and family members by performing procedures to detect, recognize, and report on surveillance directed against U.S. Government facilities and/or personnel and provides support directly, or by calling for assistance. In case of an imminent attack, calls for immediate assistance and takes action to prevent injury and death to personnel, and destruction of property.”

This job description also said preference would be given to the U.S. citizen “same-sex domestic partner” of a sponsoring U.S. government employee.

The security guard job description said: “This position provides protective services to U.S. Government employees an facilities.” It required “[t]wo years of experience in military, law enforcement or security work” and “Level I (Rudimentary Knowledge)" of English. The requirements also said: “Must be able to follow guard orders and take action in the event of an emergency.” This position opened on Jan. 2, 2012. It gave preference to a qualified U.S. citizen who was the “same-sex domestic partner” of a U.S. government employee.

The job description for the Senior Guard said: “The incumbent serves as Senior Guard in the Local Guard Force (LGF), which provides security for the Embassy by conducting perimeter patrols, controlling vehicular and pedestrian access, and providing limited emergency response in the event of a terrorist attack criminal incident, or major accident. The Senior Guard performs the most complex duties of the LGF, such as the Technical Security System (TSS), which consists of a CCTV camera system, and Imminent Danger Notification System (IDNS), an intranet-based access control application (WebPass), emergency controls, a two-way radio network and the after-hours emergency telephone line.”

continued...

Vincent

10-11-2012, 01:06 PM

continued...

The job description posted by the U.S. Embassy said the qualifications for this job included “[c]ompletion of secondary school,” “[t]hree years of experience in security, military or police work, OR, three years of experience in a field that can be directly applied to the security work required.” This person needed to be fluent in Arabic but have a “Level III (Good working knowledge)” of English.

The job description said the State Department would give preference in hiring for this position to the qualified citizen “same-sex domestic partner” of a U.S. government employee.

The salary offered for the Senior Guard position was 14,673 Libyan dinars—or a little less than $12,000 per year.

On the afternoon of Monday, Oct. 8, CNSNews.com contacted the State Department about these job descriptions posted on the website of the U.S. Embassy in Libya. CNSNews.com then sent a series of questions to a State Department press officer via email about the job postings. CNSNews.com also sent to the press officer PDF copies of the job descriptions themselves as they had been posted on the website of the U.S. Embassy in Libya. On Oct. 9, CNSNews.com contacted the State Department again, and sent its questions and the PDFs to two additional State Department press officers. On Oct. 10, CNSNews.com contacted the State Department again about it's questions. At 9:50 a.m on Oct. 10, a State Department press officer responded that they believed somebody would be responding but were "not sure of the timing."

The State Department did confirm that its policy is to give a preference in hiring at foreign missions to qualified U.S. citizens who are family members of U.S. government employees and that this policy extends to same-sex domestic partners.

In its Country Report on Human Rights in Libya, released by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on May 24, the State Department said: “Under Qadhafi the government deemed lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) orientation illegal, and official and societal discrimination against LGBT persons persisted during the year. The Qadhafi-era penal code made consensual same sex sexual activity punishable by three to five years in prison. The law provided for punishment of both parties.”

If he can't take the heat from Romney, no wonder he lets foreign leaders roll him like a barrel.

No wonder foreign leaders roll him in a barrel.

Vincent

10-29-2012, 02:01 PM

Pat Caddell, dem pollster, operative, campaigner, and all around nice guy on Judge Jeanine on Saturday night on the silence of the media...

Bsz5iZX9Db4

He seems upset. No, he's not upset. He's beyond outraged at the "president" allowing our people in Bengazi to be murdered as he watched from the WH situation room.

This bunch of criminals in the WH need to be tried for the murders of these good people and dealt the same maximum penalty (http://uscode.house.gov/download/pls/18C115.txt) any traitor would be given.

This is among the myriad reasons you don't elect @#$% like this to any office, so much less an important office.

Atlanta Dan

10-29-2012, 02:16 PM

Pat Caddell, dem pollster, operative, campaigner, and all around nice guy on Judge Jeanine on Saturday night on the silence of the media...

Caddell has been alienated from Obama for years - for whatever reason the Dems do not think the path to electoral victory resides in the wisdom of one of Jimmy Carter's senior operatives

The Hillary Moment

President Obama can't win by running a constructive campaign, and he won't be able to govern if he does win a second term.

We write as patriots and Democrats—concerned about the fate of our party and, most of all, our country. We do not write as people who have been in contact with Mrs. Clinton or her political operation. Nor would we expect to be directly involved in any Clinton campaign.

If President Obama is not willing to seize the moral high ground and step aside, then the two Democratic leaders in Congress, Sen. Harry Reid and Rep. Nancy Pelosi, must urge the president not to seek re-election—for the good of the party and most of all for the good of the country. And they must present the only clear alternative—Hillary Clinton. :toofunny:

http://www.shoebat.com/2012/10/31/li...sy-in-tripoli/
Libyan Leaks: Secret Document reveals Al-Qaeda ‘brother’ put in control of U.S. Embassy in Tripoli
By Shoebat Foundation on October 31, 2012
Walid Shoebat and Ben Barrack

A treasure trove of secret documents has been obtained by a Libyan source who says that secularists in his country are increasingly wanting to see Mitt Romney defeat Barack Obama on November 6th. This charge is being made despite Muslim Brotherhood losses in Libyan elections last July which resulted in victory for the secularists. One of those documents may help explain this sentiment.

It shows that in supporting the removal of Gadhafi, the Obama administration seemed to sign on to an arrangement that left forces loyal to Al-Qaeda in charge of security at the U.S. embassy in Tripoli from 2011 through at least the spring of 2012.

The National Transitional Council, which represented the political apparatus that opposed Gadhafi in 2011 and served as the interim government after his removal, made an extremely curious appointment in August of 2011. That appointment was none other than Abdel Hakim Belhaj, an Al-Qaeda ally and ‘brother’. Here is a copy of that letter (translation beneath it):

National Transitional Council – Libya
8/30/11
Code: YGM-270-2011
Mr. Abdel Hakim Al-Khowailidi Belhaj
Greetings,
We would like to inform you that you have been commissioned to the duties and responsibilities of the military committee of the city of Tripoli. These include taking all necessary procedures to secure the safety of the Capital and its citizens, its public and private property, and institutions, to include all international embassies. To coordinate with the local community of the city of Tripoli and the security assembly and defense on a national level.
Mustafa Muhammad Abdul Jalil
President, National Transitional Council – Libya
Official Seal of National Transitional Council
Copy for file.

As for Belhaj’s bonafides as an Al-Qaeda ally, consider the words of the notorious Ayman al-Zawahiri. In a report published one day prior to the date on the memo above, ABC News quoted the Al-Qaeda leader as saying the following – in 2007 – about the man the NTC put in control of Tripoli in 2011:

“Dear brothers… the amir of the mujahideen, the patient and steadfast Abu-Abdallah al-Sadiq (Belhaj); and the rest of the captives of the fighting Islamic group in Libya, here is good news for you,” Zawahiri said in a video, using Belhaj’s nom de guerre. “Your brothers are continuing your march after you… escalating their confrontation with the enemies of Islam: Gadhafi and his masters, the crusaders of Washington.”

The Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) was founded by Belhaj.

In a BBC report from one month earlier – on July 4, 2011 – a man named Al-Amin Belhaj was identified as an NTC spokesman and said the following:
“Everyone knows who Abdel Hakim Belhadj is. He is a Libyan rebel and a moderate person who commands wide respect.”

Abdel Hakim Belhaj had been identified in a video report embedded in the the BBC article as…
“…about the most powerful man in Tripoli.”

Abdel Hakim Belhaj is many things but moderate is not one of them.

Interestingly, according to a report by the Jamestown Foundation in 2005, the man who attributed the ‘moderate’ label to Abdel Hakim Belhaj was actually a leader with the Libyan Muslim Brotherhood:

This last week Al-Amin Belhadj, head of the Libyan Muslim Brotherhood, issued a press release on the Arabic language section of Libya-Watch, (Mu’assasat al-Raqib li-Huqquq al-Insan) calling for urgent action on behalf of 86 Brotherhood members imprisoned since 1998 at Tripoli’s Abu Salim prison and on hunger strike since October 7.

The nexus between Al-Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood comes into clearer focus when one looks at the Libyan Ambassador to the United States. His name is Ali Sulaiman Aujali. He had the following to say about Belhaj according to an ABC News report:
“(Belhaj) should be accept(ed) for the person that he is today and we should deal with him on that basis… people evolve and change.”

Really? How many times do westerners have to fall for this line before they trip over it?

In fact, about one month prior to Aujali’s vouching for Belhaj, he appeared at the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) convention. ISNA is a Muslim Brotherhood front group in America.

Aujali represents one individual who is willing to bridge the gap between Al-Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood.

Now, fast forward to 9/13/12, two days after the attack in Benghazi. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton celebrated the Muslim Eid holiday in the Ben Franklin room in Washington, D.C. and shared a podium with none other than Ali Sulaiman Aujali and a woman named Farah Pandith, who is a prominent name inside the Muslim Brotherhood in America.

In 2009, Pandith was sworn in as a U.S. Representative to Muslim Communities by Hillary Clinton. Pandith followed the path of the first Muslim elected to the U.S. Congress and was sworn in on the Qur’an.

Another interesting alliance revealed itself in various cities across America in the days after the death of Ambassador Stevens. In at least both Los Angeles, CA and Columbus, OH the Libyan American Association aligned with CAIR to hold a vigil for Ambassador Stevens.

While in Jamaica in June of 2011, Hillary Clinton rhetorically asked:
…whose side are you on? Are you on Qadhafi’s side or are you on the side of the aspirations of the Libyan people…

At that very moment – and in light of the release of this secret document – the appropriate question would have been:
…whose side are you on? Are you on Qadhafi’s side or are you on the side of Al-Qaeda…

When put that way, Hillary’s position isn’t nearly as unassailable.

Walid Shoebat is a former member of the Muslim Brotherhood and author of For God or For Tyranny

While House spokesman Jay Carney said Biden’s “we” applied only to Biden, Obama and the White House. As the National Security Council is part of the White House, Carney was saying the NSC was in the dark over the Aug. 16 cable that had warned about the exact attack that occurred.

What else have we lately learned?

The State Department was following the Benghazi assault in real time.

Three emails came from the compound that night. The first described the attack; the second came as the firing stopped; the third reported that Ansar al-Sharia was claiming credit.

From an Oct. 26 report by Jennifer Griffin, also of Fox News, we now know there were two drones over Benghazi the night of Sept. 11 capable of sending pictures to U.S. commanders within reach of Benghazi, and to the CIA, Pentagon and White House.

We also know that ex-SEAL Ty Woods, in the CIA safe house a mile away, was denied permission to go to the rescue of the compound, and that he disobeyed orders, went and brought back the body of diplomat Sean Smith.

After the attack on the compound, the battle shifted to the safe house – for four more hours. Another ex-SEAL, Glen Doherty, made it to Benghazi from Tripoli. Seven hours after the initial assault that killed Ambassador Stevens and Smith, Doherty and Woods were still returning fire, when, having been abandoned on the orders of someone higher up, they were killed by a direct mortar hit.

Due to stonewalling and the complicity of the Big Media in ignoring or downplaying the Benghazi story during the last weeks of the campaign, the Obamaites may get past the post on Nov. 6 without being called to account.

But the truth is coming out, and an accounting is coming. For the character, competence and credibility of Obama’s entire national security team have been called into question.

Hillary Clinton said she takes full responsibility for any security failure by her department at the Benghazi compound. But what does that mean? Did she see the Aug. 16 secret cable sent to her by Stevens describing his perilous situation? Was she oblivious to the battle in her department over security in Benghazi?

This failure that occurred in her shop and on her watch, that Stevens warned about in his Aug. 16 cable, resulted in his death and the most successful terrorist attack on this country since 9/11.

Why has Hillary not explained her inaction – or stepped down?

The CIA has issued a terse statement saying it gave no order to anyone not to try to rescue the ambassador or not to move forces to aid Doherty and Woods, who died because no help came.

Who, then, did refuse to send help? Who did give the orders to “stand down”?

The president says he is keeping Americans informed as we learn the truth. But is that still credible?

When did Obama learn that State was following the Benghazi attack in real time, that camera-carrying drones were over the city that night, that a seven-hour battle was fought, that desperate cries for help were being turned down.

The CIA had to know all this. Did Tom Donilon of the NSC not know it? Did he not tell the president?

Five days after Benghazi, Susan Rice went on five national TV shows to say the attack was a spontaneous protest over an anti-Muslim video.

Did the president not know she was talking nonsense? Could he himself have still been clueless about what went on in Benghazi?